Consumer Law Library

Warner-Lambert Company

Volume 85 · 85 F.T.C. 888

Citation
85 F.T.C. 888
Docket
8850
Decision
1975-05-22
Document type
other
Case type
other
Outcome
other
Relief
other
Source
Original volume PDF
Original PDF
This decision as a PDF

Cite this decision

Warner-Lambert Company, 85 F.T.C. 888 (1975). Consumer Law Library, https://consumerlawlibrary.org/decisions/v085-0104

Report an error in this record (decision id v085-0104)

Order status: unknown. Sunset may be extended by the latest qualifying federal-court complaint alleging an order violation; complaints, dismissal/appeal outcomes, and respondent-specific extensions are not fully tracked.

Cited by 0 later FTC decisions

Cites

Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)

Order 85 F.T.C.

the corporate respondent which may affect compliance obligations arising out of the order, such as dissolution, assignments or sale resulting in the emergence of a successor corporation or the creation or dissolution of subsidiaries.

IN THE MATTER OF

WARNER-LAMBERT COMPANY

Docket 8850. Order, May 22, 1975

Complaint counsel's motion for corrections in the official transcript of the oral argument granted; and procedures clarified for reception of motions to correct transcript.

ORDER CORRECTING TRANSCRIPT AND CLARIFYING PROCEDURES FOR RECEPTION OF MOTIONS TO CORRECT TRANSCRIPT

This matter is before the Commission upon the Motion of Counsel Supporting the Complaint, filed Jan. 14, 1975, requesting certain corrections in the official transcript of the oral argument in this matter, held Dec. 18, 1974. Said motion having been served on respondent Warner-Lambert Company on Jan. 17, 1975, and respondent having filed no timely answer thereto; It is ordered, That the said motion be granted and that a copy of said motion be attached to the official copy of the transcript of the oral argument to provide a record of the corrections adopted.

Henceforth, the Commission will entertain only joint motions of the parties requesting corrections in the transcript of oral argument, except that the Commission will receive a unilateral motion which recites that the parties have made a good faith effort to stipulate to the desired corrections but have been unable to do so. If the parties agree in part and disagree in part, they should file a joint motion incorporating the extent of their agreement and, if desired, separate motions requesting those corrections to which they have been unable to agree.

FILMDEX CHEX SYSTEM INC., ET AL. 889

889 Complaint

IN THE MATTER OF

FILMDEX CHEX SYSTEM INCORPORATED, ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACTS

Docket C-2669. Complaint, May 16, 1975-Decision, May 16, 1975

Consent order requiring a Centreville, Va., credit reporting company, among other things to cease furnishing, in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act; such information as has been gathered by respondents on consumers to persons without a permissible purpose.

Appearances

For the Commission: Bernard Rowitz and Irvin E. Abrams. For the respondents: John R. Foley, Foley & Foley, Wash., D.C.

COMPLAINT

Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Filmdex Chex System Incorporated, a corporation, and Joseph E. Slattery, individually and as an officer of said corporation, hereinafter sometimes referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said Acts, and it appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof would be in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint stating its charges in that respect as follows:

PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent Filmdex Chex System Incorporated is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal office and place of business located at 15500 Lee Hwy., Centreville, Va. Respondent Joseph E. Slattery is an officer of the corporate respondent. He formulates, directs and controls the acts and practices of the corporate respondent, including the acts and practices hereinafter set forth. His business address is the same as that of the corporate respondent.

PAR. 2. Subsequent to Apr. 25, 1971, in the ordinary course and conduct of their business, respondents have compiled and published lists containing, among other things, the names and addresses of consumers, together with statements or indications that such consumers have outstanding unpaid bills, or with statements or indications that such consumers have issued forged checks, checks drawn upon

589-799 O - 76 - 57

← 85 F.T.C. 878 · 85 F.T.C. 889 →